Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: update to tree-sitter 0.23 #46

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Sep 9, 2024

Conversation

hendrikvanantwerpen
Copy link
Contributor

Tree-sitter released version 0.23 recently. This contains a breaking, but ultimately very good change to how parser bindings work (tree-sitter/tree-sitter#3069). The TLDR of that change is that parsers do not depend on tree-sitter anymore, but instead on a shard (and supposedly very stable) tree-sitter-language crate. As a result, clients are free to chose their tree-sitter version as the parser ABI is supported. Library and parser versions are less tighly coupled, and it should no longer be necessary to move all the parsers to the next tree-sitter version in lock-step to be able to upgrade the library.

Most of the changes in this PR are from running tree-sitter generate. I'll add comments on other changes I did to explain why I thought they are necessary, or where I'm not sure I did it correctly.

package.json Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@hendrikvanantwerpen
Copy link
Contributor Author

hendrikvanantwerpen commented Sep 6, 2024

@amaanq I saw you did similar changes to many of the grammars in the tree-sitter org, so perhaps it is possible that you review this? Nvm, looks like your an org admin, but grammars have their own maintainers.

@amaanq
Copy link
Member

amaanq commented Sep 6, 2024

Yeah I can take a look & tweak this later today.

@ObserverOfTime ObserverOfTime changed the title Update to tree-sitter 0.23 feat: update to tree-sitter 0.23 Sep 9, 2024
@amaanq amaanq merged commit 99fc677 into tree-sitter-grammars:main Sep 9, 2024
3 of 4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants